Moray Callum is to succeed J May as head of Ford's global design team as part of a round of senior management changes
6 November 2013

Ford's global design boss, J Mays is retiring after 16 years at the firm. He will be replaced by Moray Callum on 1 January 2014.

Callum will lead the design of all production and concept vehicles produced under the Ford and Lincoln banners. As executive director, design, Callum has been responsible for all cars and trucks designed in Ford's North and South America studios and Lincoln models. 

Recent work includes the Ford Ecosport and Lincoln MKZ. The brother of Jaguar design head Ian Callum was credited with Mazda's design turnaround between 2001 and 2006.

Mays, group vice president and chief creative officer, design, led development of the Ford design language which has influenced most of the firm's global product portfolio. As well as leading the design teams responsible for the Focus, Fiesta and Mustang, he was responsible for a number of concepts including the Ford Evos and Lincoln MKC. He retires after more than 30 years in the industry.

The moves are part of a senior leadership reshuffle. North America production boss Jim Tetreault is to retire and will be replaced by current executive director for manufacturing operations Bruce Hettle. Labour affairs chief Marty Mulloy is to be succeeded by Bill Dirksen. Former Ford of Brazil chief, Steven Armstrong becomes head of Ford South America.

Our Verdict

Ford Fiesta
Fiestas sold in Europe are ostensibly the same as those sold in America and Asia

The seventh-generation Ford Fiesta is the UK's best selling car, helped by frugal engines, handling verve and a big car feel

Join the debate

Comments
10

6 November 2013
The Lincoln MKZ is a nice enough motor, looks-wise, but frankly if Moray Callum is responsible for the EcoSport (and I'm surprised anyone would claim responsibility for that monstrosity) then he really ought not to be let near pencil and paper again. J May's CV seems much more impressive. Let's hope this isn't the start of a downward trend for Ford design.


6 November 2013
When I started reading this I thought Callum worked for Jag it is amazing how two brothers can climb so high in the same field.

6 November 2013
The downward trend for Ford started with J Mays. He destroyed virtually every brand he touched. This is the man who gave us the Jaguar X Type, almost finishing off a decent brand in the process. This is the man who gave us the 2002 "Lady Penelope" Thunderbird, wiping out a popular US sub-brand in a few short years. In fact, this is the man who destroyed the PAG system at Ford, leaving all the brands within it near death and directionless. Great designer!

6 November 2013
[quote=Norma Smellons]The downward trend for Ford started with J Mays. He destroyed virtually every brand he touched. This is the man who gave us the Jaguar X Type, almost finishing off a decent brand in the process. This is the man who gave us the 2002 "Lady Penelope" Thunderbird, wiping out a popular US sub-brand in a few short years. In fact, this is the man who destroyed the PAG system at Ford, leaving all the brands within it near death and directionless. Great designer![/quote] Bit harsh. - The Jag X Type was moderately successful, and set out what it intended to do - give Jag a competitor in the junior exec sector. Yes it was Mondeo based, but many Audis share components with VWs and Skodas and the sheeple still flock to them. The design was intended to evoke the XJ - similar to the styling similarities of the A4 - A8, 3series - 7 series, C class - S class etc. - The Thunderbird was part of Ford's 'Living Legends' promotion of the early 2000s. They'd noticed how fashionable retro had become, so started a small range of cars which would have retro appeal - the Thunderbird, Ford 49 concept, the GT, Mustang (the later-current variant would get more retro cues). He didn't kill off 'a popular US sub-brand' - the Thunderbird name had already been dormant since 1997 when it was last used on a car that looked like a 2 door mk3 Granada saloon. - Brands under PAG thrived, and were only sold off in the mid 2000s when the current economic meltdown was on the cards. Jaguar when it left, with the XF, was in an infinitely better position than the Jag of the 80s, similarly Land Rover now has a strong portfolio thanks in part to Ford ownership. Volvo moved from boxy estate cars to sleek saloons and popular SUVs. Aston Martin would've been otherwise dead.

6 November 2013
1. That is wrong - the X Type was not remotely successful. It was a disaster for Jaguar and Ford and one which they did not repeat. It took Jaguar down-market and it lost Ford billions. This was because J Mays forced Geoff Lawson and Ian Callum to accept a shrunken retro design with cheap detailing. A design which they did not want - a fact recently confirmed by the company. Component sharing was never the issue; Jaguar design has never looked better since they've been free of his interference. 2. Thunderbird may have been dormant but Ford had big plans for the 2002 version; it was meant to be a medium volume model and they even thought of bringing it to Europe. Sales of the 2002 TBird tapered to nothing, very quickly. Suffice to say, it won't be coming back now. This is because Mays copied the blobby style of the 1989 Nissan 300ZX/1997 VW Beetle and applied some retro to it. Wholly inappropriate to the trad values of the TBird's sector. Ironically, when Mays did apply his retroism it was in places (Jaguar) where buyers did not want it. 3. That is plain wrong, PAG was bleeding money by 2004 (with the possible exception of Volvo, funnily enough the brand farthest away from Mays) and the reason why is not hard to fathom - the designs were poor and not enough people bought the cars. Mays in no way established Jaguar as a premium player under his tenure. As to Aston, Ford purchased that a whole decade before J Mays showed up. So then, PAG, post J Mays: Volvo is Chinese, Jag/LR is Indian and Aston belongs to the Arabs. Lincoln is as directionless as ever and Ford's sales are not radically improved. Mays had, at least in the form of PAG, gilt-edged brands to work with. And he couldn't do it.

6 November 2013
[quote=Norma Smellons]1. That is wrong - the X Type was not remotely successful. It was a disaster for Jaguar and Ford and one which they did not repeat. It took Jaguar down-market and it lost Ford billions. .[/quote] Jaguar carried out massive consumer research prior to the release/design of the S-Type, X-Type and previous gen XJ, and the designs they came up with represented what the research indicated was wanted. However they didnt sell because they where not what the customers actually wanted. I am still trying to figure out how the X-Type lost Ford billions, it was a posh Mondeo, all the engineering cost would have already been accounted for when they designed the Mondeo, all it actually needed was just a new body style and a few bits of interior trim, and that doesn't cost billions. The platform cost $6 to design as a world platform and was used in the Ford Mondeo, Ford Contour, Mercury Mystique, and Mercury Cougar, it was also redesigned with input from Mazda and used in the Mk3 Mondeo and a fair few other vehicles. The X-Type may not have made Ford the billions they expected, but there is no way logically it can have lost them billions, the other problem was the lack of other body shapes, an estate and coupe should have been designed and produced at the same time as the saloon.

7 November 2013
Market research is ok but it was remiss of Ford to base its designs on this. Customers can't design cars and generally don't know what they want. However they can be persuaded to part with more cash if the product is demonstrably premium. The X Type failed because it wasn't. Mays and his cronies in Dearborn (Mays was based in London, amazingly enough) had no idea how the European market operated. They applied a very American approach (think early 80's GM and the "J" car) to Jaguar in which the detailing and "touch" quality was no better than that of a Ford. It failed as consumers might not know precisely what they want but they are not stupid - they didn't see why the X Type should cost more than a Mondeo. Ford was also very late to the party with Diesel and it suffered badly in Europe for this. Again, a very American mindset as Diesel continues to have little penetration across the pond.

9 November 2013
[quote=Norma Smellons]Market research is ok but it was remiss of Ford to base its designs on this. Customers can't design cars and generally don't know what they want. However they can be persuaded to part with more cash if the product is demonstrably premium. The X Type failed because it wasn't. Mays and his cronies in Dearborn (Mays was based in London, amazingly enough) had no idea how the European market operated. They applied a very American approach (think early 80's GM and the "J" car) to Jaguar in which the detailing and "touch" quality was no better than that of a Ford. It failed as consumers might not know precisely what they want but they are not stupid - they didn't see why the X Type should cost more than a Mondeo. Ford was also very late to the party with Diesel and it suffered badly in Europe for this. Again, a very American mindset as Diesel continues to have little penetration across the pond.[/quote] Still doesnt explain your comment the X-Type lost Ford/Jaguar billions, it didnt, because it didnt cost billions to produce.

9 November 2013
The X Type lost Ford billions. The scale of the loss was confirmed by Bernstein Research recently, to no-one's great surprise. Just to redevelop CDW27 (however badly) as a Jaguar, then tool up for it (at a separate factory) then equip the dealer network (non-Ford) then market the whole thing, and then build it, lost Ford well over a billion dollars. An entire factory produced the miniscule volumes of the X Type for seven years, losing money every year. Halewood eventually produced the Freelander too, but neither were of sufficient volume to run the factory at a profit. Had they produced it in Belgium (alongside the Mondeo) then the losses may have been lessened, but not to the extent that Ford would have repeated the exercise - the sales volumes were embarrassingly low. The whole debacle convinced Ford in Dearborn that Jaguar was yet another "dead" British brand which they should sell. So they did.

6 November 2013
Good riddance indeed. One only has to google 'Ford Five Hundred' or 'Freestyle' to see some of his worst work.

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

  • Skoda-Karoq 2.0 TDI 4x4
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Diesel version of Skoda’s junior SUV is unobtrusive and undemanding, but we’d still go for the silkier petrol version of the Karoq
  • Audi Q7 e-tron
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Expensive and flawed but this understated diesel-electric Audi Q7 has a lot to offer
  • Citroën C3
    First Drive
    16 October 2017
    Is the third gen Citroën C3 ‘fresh and different’ enough to take on its supermini rivals? We spend six months with one to find out
  • BMW X3
    First Drive
    15 October 2017
    A satisfying rework of the X3 that usefully improves its handling, cabin finish, space and connectivity to make this BMW a class front-runner again
  • Vauxhall Insignia Country Tourer
    First Drive
    13 October 2017
    Off-road estate is now bigger, more spacious and available with torque-vectoring all-wheel drive, but is it enough to make its German rivals anxious?